Actually, my analysis is correct only under the assumption that
the surface of contact between water and pot bottom is sufficient
to allow the water to absorb all the heat from the stove.
This is true, I believe, due to the high specific heat of water,
and due to the fact that convection (hot water raising, cooler
water replacing the hot one) makes the heat transfer very
efficient.
However, if the heat transfer at the bottom surface were a
constraint to the heating rate of the water, then maybe having
all-clads would help, since the sides would also contribute to
heat transfer.

This is becoming a bit complicated just to make pasta! :-)

BTW, a quick trick, for those still reading: if you make pasta,
a quick way to pre-heat the dishes is to use them (one by one)
as lids for the pot (this presumes that the dishes are wider than
the pot; otherwise use method B below). Just dry them off
with a towel then before putting them on the table. Not
very elegant, but very effective.
Another way (method B) consists in putting a bit of the hot cooking
water in the dish, and then pouring it out and drying the dish
before putting it on the table.
This method is better also when many dishes need to be pre-heated.
Preheating pasta dishes is very nice! I never like lukewarm pasta.

All the best, and thanks for all the advice posted here,

Peter

(Peter Lampione) wrote in message . com>...
[...]
> 2) Not all metals used for cooking are good conductors: stainless steel
> is a poor conductor, while aluminum or copper are much better.
> Since I want to heat the water, rather than the air around it,
> the best pot would be one whose bottom is very conductive, and whose
> sides are not good conductors (to keep the water inside warm, instead
> of heating the air). This would call for an aluminum (or copper) bottom,
> and stainless steel sides.
> Pots that use good heat conductors in the sides do so for cooking
> roasts or other food; for heating water, it's not only not needed,
> but (very slightly) counterproductive.
[...]